View Full Version : Star Wars: Empire at War
Ok, I'm aware that most star wars games tend not to be that good. But this one has got me excited. You have a total war lite element to it, then space battles (which are reputed to be excellent) and then the ground battles. It's star wars which I liked and is made by the people who made red alert (well some of them anyways) which can be a positive or negative depending on how you look at it.
So, any thoughts on this?
I haven't played it yet but I've heard from people who have that the base-building aspect of the game really sucks.
Voigtkampf
02-20-2006, 15:53
Well, I played the demo, and space battles alone are worth getting it. Especially if you are a Star Wars fan. I played the modded demo, which gave you the access to almost all technology as well as both sides, but can’t wait to get my hands on the complete game, which should happen very soon. :book:
Steppe Merc
02-20-2006, 21:51
If I had an unlimited amount of money, I'd get it, but I'm trying to save up for Oblivion and the graphics card update I need for it... so I will not be getting it.
I thought the space bits were good, the land bits very very lame.
Republic Commando is the best Star Wars games since TIE Fighter...
I thought the space bits were good, the land bits very very lame.
Republic Commando is the best Star Wars games since TIE Fighter...
Hear hear!!!
Republic commando was crap in a slip case. I couldn't even be bothered to finish the demo it sucked so bad. Empire at war on the other hand is a really good strategy game.
Samurai Waki
02-21-2006, 11:27
I personally felt the the KOTOR series was best Star Wars game made.
I personally felt the the KOTOR series was best Star Wars game made.
I'll agree with you there
Republic commando was crap in a slip case. I couldn't even be bothered to finish the demo it sucked so bad. Empire at war on the other hand is a really good strategy game.
It was great, demo was a bit weak...
It was brilliant, finally a Star Wars game showing that super-battle droids really are big scary buggers, the wookies are huge hairy things who tower over everyone. Something the movies were really missing.
KOTOR was good too. Combat was a little weak and way too linear though.
lancelot
02-22-2006, 01:10
Empire at war on the other hand is a really good strategy game.
From the demo, I cant say I saw a lot of strategy there...aside from the 1992 Command & conquer variety....first one to build 50 tanks and rush the base wins...
This game is strategy-lite....the diet coke of strategy, if you will. :laugh4:
Strategy in this age for me comprises at least some, if not all, of the following-
-morale
-fatigue
-experience
-terrain factors, hills/forests/rivers etc etc
E.A.W has notta one (that I could see anyway). I'll probably get this game once it hits the bargin bin.
I played many action games in the SW universe but I found republic commander to be a total bore.
From the demo, I cant say I saw a lot of strategy there...aside from the 1992 Command & conquer variety....first one to build 50 tanks and rush the base wins...
This game is strategy-lite....the diet coke of strategy, if you will. :laugh4:
Strategy in this age for me comprises at least some, if not all, of the following-
-morale
-fatigue
-experience
-terrain factors, hills/forests/rivers etc etc
E.A.W has notta one (that I could see anyway). I'll probably get this game once it hits the bargin bin.
It's actually both. The skirmish games are the whole base building type of strategy game. The imperial campagin however has terriian and weather effects. Hills blocked my Stormtroppers blaster fire. Sandstorms on a desert planet reduced the accuracy of missiles by 50%. Also in the miperial campagin you recruit all the troops you have for a battle before you fight it and they can't be replaced. It's diet total war. And morale/fatigue are not nessisary.
lancelot
02-22-2006, 15:25
And morale/fatigue are not nessisary.
As a TW player you think moral & fatigue are not neccesary?? Ok...a bit of a surprising comment. It doesnt just apply to ground troops either...ships and certainly starfighters would bug out if things get to rough..is that implemented? I bet it isnt.
Morale IMHO is a crucial element to add a bit of 'realism' to any game. I dont want to see a trooper standing in the middle of a field alone while he is attacked by 400 enemy troops until he inevitably dies.
And hills and sandstorms and such are obstacles-nothing more. Certainly not a new feature. When I say hills etc, I mean the effects of fighting up-hill, of taking the high ground etc etc...
Bob the Insane
02-22-2006, 15:33
Picked this up last Thursday and played over the weekend...
Firstly it is a good Star Wars game which is rare enough this days to be of note.
As an RTS game it is still pretty good I think and is like a simplified version of the TW style of game in many ways. With the big exception that the strategy (Galactic) map is real time too and not turn based. The Galactic map is pasied for the duration of battles. Build structures and troops in the Galactic map to use them in your battles (sounds familier?)...
An interesting element (that could be used in the TW games I think) is that structures that produce military units also provide garrison troops for any battle that takes place in that location. These troops are additional to any you have already built and exist only during the battle. These garrision troops are replaced during the course of the battle whenever they are killed on the field as long as the structure remains standing.
This actually introduces a nice strategic/tactical element ot the game. In an example playing as the Rebelion on Medium I hold most of the outlying systems and am trying to crack Tantooine that would seriously interupt Imperial cashflow and movements. But while the rebel fleet managed to sweep away the Imperial presence in orbit the ground was a different matter. There was already a reasonable amount of imperial troops on the ground (including AT-ATs!) they also had two Barracks, two Light Vehicle Factories and two Heavy Vehicles factories (and Turbo laser emplacements). This results in a massive garrision force and you simply can't land troops fast efnough before the landing zone is overwhelmed with AT-STs and imperial tanks. So my answer was to send in a force of Speeders to attack the military structures to reduce the garrison force to a manageable level. This combined with Y-Wing bombing runs from orbit was a success but with the loss of the landing zones and no means to recapture them (another stop on the tank rush is that only infantry can capture the landing zones) meant this was a one way trip for the Speeder pilots. So the next time we fight it should be a bit easier...
The units are nicely balanced and having a variety is very important unless you know exactly what to expect from the enemy. No unit is totally uber as there will be at least one other unit that can destory if with ease. This is particaulrly noticable in the ground battles. If you try a tank rush and the eney has a reasonable number of rocket troops and AT emplacments then your tank rush will be reduced to a smoldering pile in a blink of an eye...
In my above example the Speeders sounded quite uber and they are a bit against structures and vehicles (especially AT-ATs). But they can't capture landing zones and are not particular effective at killing enemy troops and even one AA emplacement can reduce them to so much scrap very quickly...
In my opinion it is a very gound example of an RTS game. But it is still an RTS game and those who are slow of mouse will suffer...
As a TW player you think moral & fatigue are not neccesary?? Ok...a bit of a surprising comment. It doesnt just apply to ground troops either...ships and certainly starfighters would bug out if things get to rough..is that implemented? I bet it isnt.
I have to preface this by saying far too many TW players expect far too much from their strategy games. Morale/fatigue can be hinderance and game killer rather than an enhancement. It depends how deep into the gameplay it's ingrained. Hence why it works in TW but would be not so good in another game. Morale/fatigue are icing rather than cake.
And it's Starwars ferchrisake. Morale has no place in anything with Starwars on the box. Have you watched the movies?
Morale IMHO is a crucial element to add a bit of 'realism' to any game. I dont want to see a trooper standing in the middle of a field alone while he is attacked by 400 enemy troops until he inevitably dies.
In EaW 1 trooper couldn'ttake on 400 enemies no matter how much fire power he had. 3 shots and he'd die.
And hills and sandstorms and such are obstacles-nothing more. Certainly not a new feature. When I say hills etc, I mean the effects of fighting up-hill, of taking the high ground etc etc...
Make up your mind then. You asy you want terrrain effects. But when I list them you say they are the wrong kind. :dizzy2:
lancelot
02-22-2006, 20:50
I have to preface this by saying far too many TW players expect far too much from their strategy games. Morale/fatigue can be hinderance and game killer rather than an enhancement. It depends how deep into the gameplay it's ingrained. Hence why it works in TW but would be not so good in another game. Morale/fatigue are icing rather than cake.
And it's Starwars ferchrisake. Morale has no place in anything with Starwars on the box. Have you watched the movies?
I dont see it as asking 'too much' I see it as a rather standard component of any credible 'strategy' game. But then, thats just me.
Have I watched the moves....er yea... the second scene of Ep4 is rebel troopers running away from stromtroopers... :idea2: Troops run from the ground assault in ep5 etc. That kinda fits my description of morale (or lack of).
In EaW 1 trooper couldn'ttake on 400 enemies no matter how much fire power he had. 3 shots and he'd die.
I was trying to make the point that the chances of one man standing there in the first place, is in itself- stupid.
Make up your mind then. You asy you want terrrain effects. But when I list them you say they are the wrong kind. :dizzy2:
Thats just quibbling over semantics...
The fact that a hill is in the way does not have any effect on a soldier (other than obviously blocking a possible shot). I thought I was being reasonably clear when I said by effects, I meant the influence fighting up pr down a hill would/should have on a soldier for example- ala how it does in every TW game.
Why do people always want a height-bonus in modern/sci-fi games anyway?
You don´t really think a laser would fire further from the top of a hill, do you?
It may make a difference when using a bow, but a tank for example may not even be able to aim at an enemy much lower than the tank itself, so height-bonus for example is not always correct in modern/sci-fi games.
Geoffrey S
02-22-2006, 22:09
Tactically retreating, I think you'll find. Far as I can remember there's never a moment where anyone runs away during a Star Wars movie; in most battles you'll find the Rebels and Imperials fight to the death, such as in the opening scenes of IV and when assaulting the Death Stars.
Morale has no place in a Star Wars game; it should be up to the player to determine when a unit leaves the battlefield (if at all), just as it is in the films. Strangely, I've never heard anyone complaining about the lack of a morale system in KOTOR (the best Star Wars game, in my opinion) or in any number of excellent action games.
Terrain however should play an important role in any strategy game if 3d graphics are to have any relevance, at least giving range and defense bonuses to troops holding the high ground.
An interesting element (that could be used in the TW games I think) is that structures that produce military units also provide garrison troops for any battle that takes place in that location. These troops are additional to any you have already built and exist only during the battle. These garrision troops are replaced during the course of the battle whenever they are killed on the field as long as the structure remains standing.
Something I've been hoping to see in a TW game too; it'd be more historically accurate and make gameplay more interesting rather than forcing the player to build up pointless defensive armies to subdue the population before heading off to conquer another couple of cities and repeating the process. The player could however choose how much to spend on such garrisons and citizen troops, determining the size of such forces and the quality.
lancelot
02-23-2006, 00:57
Why do people always want a height-bonus in modern/sci-fi games anyway?
You don´t really think a laser would fire further from the top of a hill, do you?
No, of course not but that wasnt why I was sugesting it. The high ground gives at least 2 advantages that I can think of off the top of my head-
1) The psychological advantage of the high ground itself.
2) Added difficulty of having to scramble up a hill and fight if your forces are trying to take the position.
Tactically retreating, I think you'll find. Far as I can remember there's never a moment where anyone runs away during a Star Wars movie; in most battles you'll find the Rebels and Imperials fight to the death, such as in the opening scenes of IV
Yea right! The retreat on hoth was hardly tactical. In my book a tactical retreat involves a fighting withdrawl...hoth was drop your weapon and run.
And fighting to the death...in the opening of ep4 when you clearly see stormtroopers escorting disarmed rebel trooper prisoners?!?!
And in the trench run when wedge bugs out...why didnt he stay and cover luke? damaged ship or not?
Bob the Insane
02-23-2006, 02:38
And in the trench run when wedge bugs out...why didnt he stay and cover luke? damaged ship or not?
Dude, he couldn't keep up!!! ;)
Geoffrey S
02-23-2006, 03:06
Yea right! The retreat on hoth was hardly tactical. In my book a tactical retreat involves a fighting withdrawl...hoth was drop your weapon and run.
They were supposed to hold out while the transports evacuated; once it was unholdable there's a specific order telling the ground troops to disengage.
And fighting to the death...in the opening of ep4 when you clearly see stormtroopers escorting disarmed rebel trooper prisoners?!?!
Fair enough. Though considering the fact that the Imperials had stun guns, as used on Leia, they may not have had much choice.
And in the trench run when wedge bugs out...why didnt he stay and cover luke? damaged ship or not?
Wedge was specifically ordered to 'Get clear, there's nothing more you can do.'.
Giving it some thought, why am I discussing Star Wars, over the internet, at 3.15 in the morning? Right, I'm off to bed. :idea2:
Mongoose
02-23-2006, 04:26
They were supposed to hold out while the transports evacuated; once it was unholdable there's a specific order telling the ground troops to disengage.
Fair enough. Though considering the fact that the Imperials had stun guns, as used on Leia, they may not have had much choice.
Wedge was specifically ordered to 'Get clear, there's nothing more you can do.'.
Giving it some thought, why am I discussing Star Wars, over the internet, at 3.15 in the morning? Right, I'm off to bed. :idea2:
I think the point is that even if they don't have moral, they should atleast have an 'automatic surrender' feature when they're overwhelmed, which allows you to trade and buy prisoners after the battle.
Given the fact that it's Star Wars, I can live with out moral. But I can't live with out XP and the ability to name the elite groups. That just takes the fun out of the ground battles...
I dont see it as asking 'too much' I see it as a rather standard component of any credible 'strategy' game. But then, thats just me.
IE you expect too much. Your expecting every game that has strategy in it's description to have components that only about 10% of all strategy games released have. Games which are only for a hardcore strat fan audience. That is unrealistic and unreasonable.
Have I watched the moves....er yea... the second scene of Ep4 is rebel troopers running away from stromtroopers... :idea2: Troops run from the ground assault in ep5 etc. That kinda fits my description of morale (or lack of).[QUOTE]
I think your just seeing what you want to see in the movies. What you call a retreat is to me a tactical withdrawl. Retreat means a unit has lost cohetion and is starting to panic. While this might happen to regular humans (I say might because a SW movie has never portrayed it). It would never happen to Stormtroppers. It would be too much like disobeying orders, and they're incapable of that.
[QUOTE=lancelot]I was trying to make the point that the chances of one man standing there in the first place, is in itself- stupid.
See above.
Thats just quibbling over semantics...
The fact that a hill is in the way does not have any effect on a soldier (other than obviously blocking a possible shot). I thought I was being reasonably clear when I said by effects, I meant the influence fighting up pr down a hill would/should have on a soldier for example- ala how it does in every TW game.
To give the best response I need proper information. Any effect for fighting up or down a hill goes out the window with blasters. The only thing that might have an advantage in EaW is the artillery units.
Mongoose
02-23-2006, 21:13
To give the best response I need proper information. Any effect for fighting up or down a hill goes out the window with blasters. The only thing that might have an advantage in EaW is the artillery units.
Yes it does. Running up a hill is always difficult, and would have an effect on the battle if part of your army was on a hill...
Reverend Joe
02-23-2006, 21:31
You people need to get out more.
...Says the man with 1770 posts. :embarassed:
lancelot
02-23-2006, 22:39
Yes it does. Running up a hill is always difficult, and would have an effect of the battle if part of your army was on a hill...
Thank you. Im glad at least one person could see what I was on about!
You guys applying TW standards to average RTS games is (rightly or wrongly) wishful thinking on your parts. The average RTS game is not going to include TW standards in it. TW is a niche unto itself.
Snowhobbit
03-01-2006, 13:13
But really, experience is needed, both the Alliance and the Empire sorely lacked experienced pilots, they were in large demand even after the conflict, anyone who've read a few SW books knows that. The game is good apart from lacking experience, something that shouldn't be too hard to put in.
Oh, and the instant repair of anything the moment the battle is over is a bit weak...
ChaosLord
03-05-2006, 22:04
Why do people always leave out the Dark Forces/Jedi Knight series when mentioning good SW games? Is it just because it wasn't based on any of the movies? Republic Commando was too restrictive for my tastes, had you riding a rail and shooting things. I did like SW: Battlefront though. But anyway as for Empire at War I like it.
While it isn't as in depth as some other strategy games it still plays well enough. You can't simply mass one type of unit and expect to win given all the counters. The large area available for showing selected troops is nice, as well as the buttons for their abilities being with them so you don't have to click between groups to use them. Thats something thats definitly an improvement. The land battles are fun and pretty hectic especially if you're assaulting a well defended planet, land AI is a bit dumb and likes to trickle troops in though.
Space battles are of course great to watch and the AI is better there as well. The easy-targetting of subsystems on capitol ships/stations is great and the asteroid fields/nebua fields make maneuvering carefully important. Its nice to be able to build up planets to use the garrisons. Infact those garrisons are what saved me when I accidently left Corsucant undefended and the rebels attacked. I had like an 45 minute long battle where both sides poured reinforcements in. The rebels from space and mine from buildings.
In the end i'm not sure how many of my own guys died since they were free it wasn't listed, but the rebels lost 19 units of infantry. I think the only reason i'm holding on at the moment is because its early in the campaign, I keep getting my forces massacred.
Which reminds me, while the land AI is a bit dumb overall individual unit AI isn't. For instance the rebel walkers will use their guns on Imperial infantry who are moving around and then switch to trying to stomp them if the infantry uses their take cover ability(greatly reduces speed but offers protection) since then they can't dodge them. I watched a few of those things tear up an infantry heavy army of mine because I had no decent anti-vehicle unit with them.
Anyway i'll stop rambling on now, just wanted to say my thoughts and experiences on the game. The game isn't all great due to AI and a bit of a cheese factor due to movie characters being controllable. I guess if you're a really big SW fan thats a good thing but it just bugs me. Those things aside its fun to play and even fun just to watch in cinematic mode.
You know I really liked the Jedi Knight games (never got around to play Dark Forces).
I don't know why, but I just forgot about it.
Perhaps it was becasue it felt rather, and now it gets ironic, fictional... It was a great shooter: Fairly intelligent enemies, varied weapons, Jedi powers that felt right, many hidden and special areas. But that was it. The story was thin, even thinner than most. And that might have to do with the lack of connection to the movies (though KOTOR I and II did rather well). The enemies were essentially too weak and often not numerous enough (this was somewhat made up for by intelligent placement and times of meeting). You only really got challenged when facing an AT-ST in the open or when you engaged the Dark Jedi.
I think I liked the games more because of their connection to Star Wars and the powers you could get, rather than any inherent strengths it had on its own.
If they had been anything but a Star Wars game they would have been good, but not spectacular games that would range along with the massive host of good but not spectacular RTS games of the same period (yes there were many RTS games worth playing, but many more not worth it).
About the KOTOR games. Well, I must admit that I have played several characters through in both games, and I absolutely love the feel. The plot is also great (though there are things that doesn't match, will explain later). The varies Force Powers are evened out to an extent by 'normal' Feats making the game much more than a Jedi game (as in The Force). It feels very balanced, though the Force Lightening power is way overpowered and Lightsaber Throw is too weak by far, but that is minor.
The quests are varied and often with quite a few solutions. I really loved the murder investigation on Dantooine.
Also one has to love the humour that creeps in from the dark. HK-47 anyone?
The customizeability of all kinds of stuff is really nice, as are all the cool references to events and people, even connecting across the two games.
The character styles are easy to understand and easy to get into. A dream for a newbie to RPGs.
But the enemies and allies are stupid to say the least! Combat starts out too slow and becomes too fast in time to feel right. It feels about right about the time you build the lightsaber in both games. Also the combat system is heavy, luckily it was seen that it was just that and the pause was introduced at the right time. But that only makes combat even heavier.
While you can make other characters they almost always feel the same way becasue the powers are not that well balanced.
The Dark Side is stupid! Unlike the deceptive, manipulating and very intelligent Dark Side that we know, you are forced to be a bully who just doesn't care or even loves power. No carelessness, no misguided goodness, no corruption (except that Bastila did comment on me using Force Persuade a little too much, despite my best intentions, nice touch more of that please). In KOTOR II it was even worse, and the only time I felt like a Sith Lord was when I broke Hanharr. As you might understand I hated this Dark Side = stupid backyard bully approach, more than anything else that might be wrong with the games. So in essence you are being led just as much as any linear FPS. You might have options to go somewhere else, but in the end the game wants you to end up in the same place regardless. I seriously tried being a Grey Jedi, but in the end it just seemed wrong to bully one person, then be all nice to the next. Far too weak system.
Lastly, while the plot was nice, and would have shone in any other game, it was just too much for Star Wars. The Jedi Order wiped out save me (and a few others of course)? The Republic nearly crushed by either the Sith or that wierd Force eater. It is simply too much! In trying to be grand the games simply sets thenselves apart from the main stories. It would have been far far better to have had the character remain a minor personality that simply helps out (or sows discord) where possible. A hero, a Jedi!
They had so much potential but like RTW never fulfilled it. And that might be even worse than a game that could never have been great, but was the best it could be, even if it technically would never be as good as the unfulfilled game.
In the end the games were very good, and certainly loveable to those that play them, but they were never great, and certainly not comparable to Tie Fighter Gold. And I think that might be the reason they are mentioned so little as the best SW games.
Yeah, I still sometimes go #Locked!# inside myself in Kyle Katarns voice, when I get to a locked door and realize I forgot my keys... this thread sure does bring about old memories. Remember that big guy and little guy alien jedis you had to fight? The way the small one jumped around with the force jump so youd go: stand still so I can chop you up properly, you little...!!!
Remember the tumbling cruiser level, all those R2D2s rolling around, squeeling?
The level where the Tie Bomber strafed you continually with plasma bombs?
The great, monumental architecture of the levels and lev design?
Stormtroopers sliding around when they strafe, us considering that being state of the art graphics - even better in some ways than Quake?
I could go on forever like this...
Does anyone remember X-wing Alliance?
Dont worry Othanna, we got you covered: Green Two: bracket high-low now!
That was WAY to close for comfort... thanks, Green Leader...
I actually remember these lines, and I played the darn game last time in 2000... phew, how these games grow into you - and Im actually more of a Star Trek fan.
Yeah, I still sometimes go #Locked!# inside myself in Kyle Katarns voice, when I get to a locked door and realize I forgot my keys... this thread sure does bring about old memories. Remember that big guy and little guy alien jedis you had to fight? The way the small one jumped around with the force jump so youd go: stand still so I can chop you up properly, you little...!!!
Yeah, those two were some of the more memorable from the game. And that little bugger was by far the hardest to beat
Vladimir
03-07-2006, 15:43
Force Commander was quite enjoyable. It had an interesting point system where you gained "command points" by destroying enemies. Is this game like a hybrid between that and Rebellion (I think it was called Empire or something in the UK)?
I found those games enjoyable even though there was a Y-wing spam “cheat” in Rebellion. This was especially irksome considering that I played TIE Fighter and know how easy it is to destroy those things. My favorite tactic as the rebels in Force Commander was to capture the AT-ATs. Wonderful machines!
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.